Warning for Young Women in U.S.

So what else is new? The de facto standard in the US now is that pretty much no one has any reasonable expectation of privacy, pretty much regardless of where they are. I figure after a few invasions of privacy ends up with the invaders' asses shot off, someone might come to their senses (but I doubt it; complete lunacy also seems to have become the de facto standard in the US these days...)
 
S
StuckinTraffic
[No message]
That's ridiculous. I've heard about this kind of Peeping Tom behaviour before. It's why modern phone-camera's have to make a sound nowadays. I also heard some guy in Japan got jailed for a couple of years or something. I find this ruling to be truly insane.
 
you can quite easily turn off your phone camera's sound though. i just got a new model and i can silence the sound effect.

I think its ridiculous.... and disgusting. I'm seriously annoyed.
 
It's not only the fact that we can't expect privacy under our own clothing, but the young woman in question was SIXTEEN. And they STILL decided he hadn't committed a crime.

Edit:

So what else is new? The de facto standard in the US now is that pretty much no one has any reasonable expectation of privacy, pretty much regardless of where they are. I figure after a few invasions of privacy ends up with the invaders' asses shot off, someone might come to their senses (but I doubt it; complete lunacy also seems to have become the de facto standard in the US these days...)

I don't think that works in public. Say the woman had been 21 and legally allowed to own and carry a pistol. If she had turned around and pulled it on him after realizing what he had done, I don't think the court would back her up either for threatening him or for (potentially) shooting him. Much as he might deserve it. On private property, however, I completely agree with you. Again, unfortunately, a lot of states don't have castle doctrines.
 
Perhaps they just charged him under the wrong statute?

He wasn't exactly a Peeping Tom according to the letter of the law, but he still did take lewd photographs of what's under the panties of an underage girl. Worse yet, he did it without the consent or knowledge of the girl (or her legal guardian, given her status as a minor). That probably flies in the face of several informed consent (or age of consent or just consent) laws as well as some minor pornography statutes. I think it's the D.A.'s office that messed up, not the jury. They should have charged him with the crime that he did commit, not with a Peeping Tom clause.
 
As far as I can tell, that was the best statute they had to file against him. They're apparently working on changing the law, but for now, this guy walks.
 
I have to agree with R H above. People who do things like this do them simply because they know that they are going to get away with it. Even worse, now every other pervert with a camera and an itch knows it too. We have gotten so obsessed in this country with giving criminals and perverts of every description a "fair break" that we've completely forgotten just who the laws were written to protect. Now I'm going to show remarkable restraint on this matter and stop before I expose any more of my red neck to all you nice folks.
 
R
Rowan Hawthorn
Problem is, it's not just the [i]criminals[/i] who take advantage of shit like this - the "good guys" are just as bad.
Well I personally am shocked by this. It's as if they are saying that she was asking for someone to take pictures up her skirt, just because she was in a public place!!! The judge sounds a moron.

Well I personally am glad I wear trousers everywhere!!!
 
God, that's disgusting... but its not just america now... we're getting worse stuff over here... a girl got indecently assulted, and the judge ruled that there was no crime because she was wearing a thong, which you could see the top of, so it was giving the guy the come-on signals. (okay i hate it when girls do that, but she wan't giving him the come-on.. she was 14!)

This whole thing about the way we have to dress/what we have to do as women, for this rulings not to occur is absolutely ridiculous, and its disgusting that judges and laws put there to protect us are having the complete opposite effect!! [Hence my wanting to be a criminal lawyer!]
 
palabravampiress
palabravampiress
*What?* Because her thong was a so-called come-on? That's ridiculous! Clothing does not equal consent.
Seriously! I mean, what is this, the nineteenth century? What happened to our rights all of a sudden? When did the "she was asking for it" defense become acceptable in court again?
 
J
Joyce Summers
:Cheers in agrement: :). I know, 19th Century thinking or what? I thought we were passed such neanderthal thoughts.
palabravampiress
palabravampiress
Yeah. I agree. I thought "she was asking for it" was kicked out of court a long time ago.
Just spent 2hours in my criminal justice seminar discussing cases like this, and I mentioned this one and the one I posted earlier, and everyone (including my lecturer) was absolutely disgusted with the outcomes. Obviously.

Its just wrong in so very many ways.
 
E
Edmund Blackadder
[No message]
No, please, regale us with your opinion. I promise not to flip out (this time), though I can't speak for everyone.

Is there a "shrug" icon? No? Okay, then: "Shrug."

I saw the courts start falling back into that line of BS during the Reagan era, when the country started taking its swing back to the right and certain fundamentalist groups got the government by the gonads. For all the public talk neo-cons make about people "taking responsibility for their own actions," the reality is that we've gone from the "it's society's fault" generation to the "it's THEIR fault" generation; and our current Prez is the friggin' poster boy for the inability to admit to being in the wrong about anything.

"Compassionate conservatism," my ass. They're all being drowned out in the racket.
 
I'm weird, because I'm generally fairly conservative, but a Feminist. I actually consider myself an "iFeminist" (Individualist Feminist), which means I'm more libertarian-leaning than conservative leaning. That said, I think that you're at least partly right. The "what did you do to piss him off?" mentality does seem to be a more conservative mentality than liberal. The hardcore conservative Christians (and I'm speaking here about those who believe all homosexuals are damned to hell regardless of their behavior or religious beliefs; that the earth was created in 7 days flat; and that Fantasy literature teaches their children how to be witches) do seem to tend to believe that woman are the root of all evil. At the same time, not ALL conservatives feel that way. But somehow, our government has become populated by extremists--on BOTH ends--while, as far as I can tell, the majority of actual people are fairly middle-of-the-road in their thinking.

It begs the question: how do we keep things like this from happening? How do we kick the "look how she dresses, she was so asking for it" defense (like in "Go Fish," for example) out of the possible defenses?
 
I'm weird, because I'm generally fairly conservative, but a Feminist. I actually consider myself an "iFeminist" (Individualist Feminist), which means I'm more libertarian-leaning than conservative leaning. That said, I think that you're at least partly right. The "what did you do to piss him off?" mentality does seem to be a more conservative mentality than liberal.
You know, I owned a video rental store/hobby shop/bookstore back in the mid-80s; the store was broken into once, and I was actually asked by the detective, "Who've you made mad at you?" (probably because the area I lived in was right on the buckle of the Bible belt and my store carried a few adult tapes and magazines, and I had an occult books section. Didn't have anything to do with it, four other stores got hit about the same time, but it was a good excuse for him to sit on his dead ass and not work the case.) My answer? "If I knew who did it, why would I bother calling you guys? I'd be standing in his doorway right now and not worrying about whether I was gonna recover anything..."

The hardcore conservative Christians (and I'm speaking here about those who believe all homosexuals are damned to hell regardless of their behavior or religious beliefs; that the earth was created in 7 days flat; and that Fantasy literature teaches their children how to be witches) do seem to tend to believe that woman are the root of all evil. At the same time, not ALL conservatives feel that way.
Of course not. Just like not ALL liberals blame, say, Heckler & Koch for the lunatics who go on a university shooting spree (you might as well blame the axe manufacturer for the Bordens's deaths. Makes about as much sense.) But, of course, "conservative" and "liberal" both get way overused as "bad names", and both get applied to people who don't really deserve the good name of either.

But somehow, our government has become populated by extremists--on BOTH ends--while, as far as I can tell, the majority of actual people are fairly middle-of-the-road in their thinking.
I agree. I suspect that most of the half-way moderate citizens have just about completely given up. I only vote myself these days just because I'll be damned if I'll let either side walk in without a struggle. My vote may not mean much, but I've always felt that there's only two ways to "waste your vote": either don't vote at all, or pull that lever that says, "Straight Party." Either way, you haven't voiced an opinion on a damn thing; all you did was say, "Hey, whatever you guys want to do is all right by me," and I just can't do that.

It begs the question: how do we keep things like this from happening? How do we kick the "look how she dresses, she was so asking for it" defense (like in "Go Fish," for example) out of the possible defenses?
I dunno, grow up as a specie? In many ways, I thought we were on our way to doing that back in the 70s. Then everything went to hell again.
 
About the not voting thing. In the UK it used to be the case, where if you ticked every-one that stood for election, it was counted as a vote, but for none of them. Now I'm not allowed to vote, and that's ok cos they're all as bad as each other here.
 
Back
Top Bottom